Jump to content

Unrealized Stadiums


raysox
 Share

Recommended Posts

***UMass Boston, not BU, if I may nitpick your post. 

 

Would've been lovely, if a little generic and not really taking advantage of the waterfront location. Of the many failed stadium plans for the Revs, this is the first time I believe the Krafts have released renderings -- kind of a strange move to say "this is what we COULD HAVE had", but presumably a damage control move to quell a fanbase that is really tired of this :censored:.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Digby said:

***UMass Boston, not BU, if I may nitpick your post. 

 

Would've been lovely, if a little generic and not really taking advantage of the waterfront location. Of the many failed stadium plans for the Revs, this is the first time I believe the Krafts have released renderings -- kind of a strange move to say "this is what we COULD HAVE had", but presumably a damage control move to quell a fanbase that is really tired of this :censored:.

Yeah my bad.

 

But I was going to say that this was the first time I had seen the pictures anywhere. I didn't even know they were considering it until yesterday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Digby said:

Of the many failed stadium plans for the Revs, this is the first time I believe the Krafts have released renderings -- kind of a strange move to say "this is what we COULD HAVE had", but presumably a damage control move to quell a fanbase that is really tired of this :censored:.

 

It is a little strange to release renderings only after the plan is dead.  Unless they think they can force UMass back to the table?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

It is a little strange to release renderings only after the plan is dead.  Unless they think they can force UMass back to the table?

 

That's my best guess? Or as I said, a statement of "look people, we were really trying!" to an angry fanbase -- but it seems like, in the face of skeptical politicians, releasing these earlier on would've been a better idea. I realize @raysox is not a local but his post kinda indicates that the general public didn't know what was happening here. The Krafts' M.O. with these things has been to keep things under wraps, which was maybe okay for managing expectations for a while, but I don't know how you're going to get the locals' support when the first thing they hear is a preemptive strike from their state reps and not the team saying "here's what we're thinking about and why it'll be good". The Revs diehards alone aren't numerous enough to form a powerful bloc here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, leopard88 said:

 

This version was also pretty cool, but I think the buildings in CF and LF may be good examples of trying just a little bit too hard.

 

Here's another A's concept. This one a post Cisco Field in San Jose proposal put forth by the city of Oakland on the waterfront near Jack London Square. Something like this may be built in the future as the site is still one the A's are considering in their ongoing stadium search, but the city's concept itself was not and will not be used by the team.

 

920x1240.jpg

 

920x920.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Digby said:

^ Does that Oakland proposal have... decorative disused gantry cranes in the outfield?

 

That was the plan, yes. The site is a recently abandoned shipping terminal (Howard Terminal).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Digby said:

 

That's my best guess? Or as I said, a statement of "look people, we were really trying!" to an angry fanbase -- but it seems like, in the face of skeptical politicians, releasing these earlier on would've been a better idea. I realize @raysox is not a local but his post kinda indicates that the general public didn't know what was happening here. The Krafts' M.O. with these things has been to keep things under wraps, which was maybe okay for managing expectations for a while, but I don't know how you're going to get the locals' support when the first thing they hear is a preemptive strike from their state reps and not the team saying "here's what we're thinking about and why it'll be good". The Revs diehards alone aren't numerous enough to form a powerful bloc here.

 

If I had to guess it would be the, "we're trying!" angle. The Revs fans have been waiting for the better part of two decades for a new stadium and have watched the entire league pass them by in making it happen (once DC's in their new digs). They're the last MLS 1.0 team left in the league and it's largely because they're stuck in Foxboro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Here's one I never knew about, the 1959 proposal to convert football only Pitt Stadium to a multi-purpose football/baseball stadium. Parking and traffic was a nightmare at a 50,000 seat Pitt Stadium, I can't image what it would be once they kicked it up to 74,000 for baseball and 80,000 for football.

https://twitter.com/PGH_Sports_Date/status/1095071701665280001DzJ5oflXgAYbsZ5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ltp74 said:

Here's one I never knew about, the 1959 proposal to convert football only Pitt Stadium to a multi-purpose football/baseball stadium. Parking and traffic was a nightmare at a 50,000 seat Pitt Stadium, I can't image what it would be once they kicked it up to 74,000 for baseball and 80,000 for football.

https://twitter.com/PGH_Sports_Date/status/1095071701665280001DzJ5oflXgAYbsZ5.jpg

 

First time ever hearing about this stadium myself.

 

I know the Pirates played on Pitt’s campus at the time, so from a logistical standpoint it makes some sense.

 

I also know the Pirates had been set on the Three Rivers site for over a decade before they moved in. They sold Forbes Field to Pitt in 1958 with the intention to move to Theee Rivers. (I say Pirates and not Pirates AND Steelers because I want to say the Steelers didn’t become part of the Three Rivers plan until after the Pirates finalized the land deal for Three Rivers. I’m not 100% on that, so don’t quote me.)

 

That’s likely what torpedoed this stadium idea before it got past the initial design phase.

 

Like you said, the infrastructure at Pitt just isn’t there to support a stadium of this size. I’m sure both the Steelers and Pirates took note of that at the time as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ltp74 said:

Here's one I never knew about, the 1959 proposal to convert football only Pitt Stadium to a multi-purpose football/baseball stadium. Parking and traffic was a nightmare at a 50,000 seat Pitt Stadium, I can't image what it would be once they kicked it up to 74,000 for baseball and 80,000 for football.

https://twitter.com/PGH_Sports_Date/status/1095071701665280001DzJ5oflXgAYbsZ5.jpg

 

It seems like that would have been a very oddly shaped stadium. They were planning to put home plate at the 50 yard line in the middle of the oval.

 

3880562958_22d5b7471b_b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's CalgaryNEXT which is probably fully dead at this point. The main issues being the fact it would cost 1.8 billion with the Flames wanting the city to pay for most of it and the land for the proposed land being contaminated with chemicals which would have cost even more money to clean up. It was also planned to be right next to the river, despite the Saddledome flooding only a few years prior. Also they would have expected the vast majority of people to take the train as they were no renderings for parking.

 

The whole Calgary arena spectacle has been discussed on the boards, including the NHL trying and failing to influence the 2017 Calgary election.

 

The smaller section was to be the arena for the Flames, Hitmen and Roughnecks with the bigger section being the Stampeders stadium/multi-sport fieldhouse.

 

n-CALGARYNEXT-628x314.jpg

 

saddledome6.jpg?quality=80&strip=all&w=3

 

The Flames and the City are starting meetings again soon so we might see some more renderings at some point, or at least some more threatening encouraging comments from Bettman and Ken King.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember reading one of those ESPN sports almanacs in 2002 that said the Devils were moving to Hoboken. I looked it up the other day and yeah, they were going to build a new arena, privately funded, near Hoboken Terminal, but couldn't get the OK from the state government, so they wound up in Newark.

 

0pbuf7nfxkvz.png?width=804&auto=webp&s=6

I like the look of the building along the waterfront there but it might be too close to New York. I don't really know where in Jersey the Devils fans tend to come from, maybe Newark is a more sensible destination.

 

I wonder whether Jersey City would have worked for them, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

It seems like that would have been a very oddly shaped stadium. They were planning to put home plate at the 50 yard line in the middle of the oval.

 

3880562958_22d5b7471b_b.jpg

In the link below you can see a wider view of what they proposed. Looks like the plan was to remove some of the lower bowl between the 30 yard lines on the press box side and then a large part of the lower section on the other side, I guess that's how they would have given it somewhat standard dimensions for baseball with temporary seating put in for football. 

Pitt Stadium was designed to have the upper deck added on the press box side if they ever wanted to expand.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=djft3U1LymYC&dat=19590211&printsec=frontpage&hl=en

Link to comment
Share on other sites

635763379275192756-Blueprints0jpg.jpg

 

This is a proposed Bills stadium from 1970 that reportedly would have also hosted baseball. I don’t know if they ever actually paid, but the county had a $60M lawsuit judgment against them at one point for backing out of an agreement to build. This was in a town east of the city instead of the site south of the city that we ended up getting. As a point on a map, it would have been nice for it to be closer to Rochester and Syracuse, but I don’t see how the actual infrastructure around this stadium would be anything near what we ended up with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.